Web-Based Intelligent Computational Argumentation based Conflict Resolution in Air Traffic Management

Collaborative decision making (CDM) is a process of reaching consensus on a potential solution of an issue through the evaluation of the different possible alternatives. the web-Based intelligent computational argumentation system allows concerned stakeholders to post their arguments on different alternatives, assign weights and priorities to the arguments and reach the most favorable alternative using fuzzy intelligent techniques over the Internet. Exchange of information among the stakeholders improves the collaboration and drives towards the collective intelligence. in this paper, we show how our tool facilitates resolution of conflicts in air traffic management. It could enhance the Ground Delay Program (GDP) and help the Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC) to take a better decision depending on the argumentation of Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) and Airlines. © 2010 IEEE

Polarization and opinion analysis in an online argumentation system for collaborative decision support

Argumentation is an important process in a collaborative decision making environment. Argumentation from a large number of stakeholders often produces a large argumentation tree. It is challenging to comprehend such an argumentation tree without intelligent analysis tools. Also, limited decision support is provided for its analysis by the existing argumentation systems. In an argumentation process, stakeholders tend to polarize on their opinions, and form polarization groups. Each group is usually led by a group leader. Polarization groups often overlap and a stakeholder is a member of multiple polarization groups. Identifying polarization groups and quantifying a stakeholder\u27s degree of membership in multiple polarization groups helps the decision maker understand both the social dynamics and the post-decision effects on each group. Frameworks are developed in this dissertation to identify both polarization groups and quantify a stakeholder\u27s degree of membership in multiple polarization groups. These tasks are performed by quantifying opinions of stakeholders using argumentation reduction fuzzy inference system and further clustering opinions based on K-means and Fuzzy c-means algorithms. Assessing the collective opinion of the group on individual arguments is also important. This helps stakeholders understand individual arguments from the collective perspective of the group. A framework is developed to derive the collective assessment score of individual arguments in a tree using the argumentation reduction inference system. Further, these arguments are clustered using argument strength and collective assessment score to identify clusters of arguments with collective support and collective attack. Identifying outlier opinions in an argumentation tree helps in understanding opinions that are further away from the mean group opinion in the opinion space. Outlier opinions may exist from two perspectives in argumentation: individual viewpoint and collective viewpoint of the group. A framework is developed in this dissertation to address this challenge from both perspectives. Evaluation of the methods is also presented and it shows that the proposed methods are effective in identifying polarization groups and outlier opinions. The information produced by these methods help decision makers and stakeholders in making more informed decisions --Abstract, pages iii-iv

A Review on Intelligent Agent Systems

Multi-agent system (MAS) is a common way of exploiting the potential power of agent by combining many agents in one system. Each agent in a multivalent system has incomplete information and is in capable of solving entire problem on its own. Multi-agent system offers modularity. If a problem domain is particularly complex, large and contain uncertainty, then the one way to address, it to develop a number of functional specific and modular agent that are specialized at solving various problems individually. It also consists of heterogeneous agents implemented by different tool and techniques. MAS can be defining as loosely coupled network of problem solvers that interact to solve problems that are beyond the individual capabilities or knowledge of each problem solver. These problem solvers, often ailed agent are autonomous and can be heterogeneous in nature. MAS is followed by characteristics, Future application, What to be change, problem solving agent, tools and techniques used, various architecture, multi agent applications and finally future Direction and conclusion. Various Characteristics are limited viewpoint, effectively, decentralized; computation is asynchronous, use of genetic algorithms. It has some drawbacks which must be change to make MAS more effective. In the session of problem solving of MAS, the agent performance measure contains many factors to improve it like formulation of problems, task allocation, organizations. In planning of multivalent this paper cover self-interested multivalent interactions, modeling of other agents, managing communication, effective allocation of limited resources to multiple agents with managing resources. Using of tool, to make the agent more efficient in task that are often used. The architecture o MAS followed by three layers, explore, wander, avoid obstacles respectively. Further different and task decomposition can yield various architecture like BDI (Belief Desire Intension), RETSINA. Various applications of multi agent system exist today, to solve the real-life problems, new systems are being developed two distinct categories and also many others like process control, telecommunication, air traffic control, transportation systems, commercial management, electronic commerce, entertainment applications, medical applications. The future aspect of MAS to solve problems that are too large, to allow interconnection and interoperation of multiple existing legacy systems etc

Efficient Decision Support Systems

This series is directed to diverse managerial professionals who are leading the transformation of individual domains by using expert information and domain knowledge to drive decision support systems (DSSs). The series offers a broad range of subjects addressed in specific areas such as health care, business management, banking, agriculture, environmental improvement, natural resource and spatial management, aviation administration, and hybrid applications of information technology aimed to interdisciplinary issues. This book series is composed of three volumes: Volume 1 consists of general concepts and methodology of DSSs; Volume 2 consists of applications of DSSs in the biomedical domain; Volume 3 consists of hybrid applications of DSSs in multidisciplinary domains. The book is shaped upon decision support strategies in the new infrastructure that assists the readers in full use of the creative technology to manipulate input data and to transform information into useful decisions for decision makers

A USER’S COGNITIVE WORKLOAD PERSPECTIVE IN NEGOTIATION SUPPORT SYSTEMS: AN EYE-TRACKING EXPERIMENT

Replying to several research calls, I report promising results from an initial experiment which com-pares different negotiation support system approaches concerning their potential to reduce a user’s cognitive workload. Using a novel laboratory-based non-intrusive objective measurement technique which derives the user’s cognitive workload from pupillary responses and eye-movements, I experi-mentally evaluated a standard, a chat-based, and an argumentation-based negotiation support system and found that a higher assistance level of negotiation support systems actually leads to a lower user’s cognitive workload. In more detail, I found that an argumentation-based system which fully automates the generation of the user’s arguments significantly decreases the user’s cognitive workload compared to a standard system. In addition I found that a negotiation support system implementing an additional chat function significantly causes higher cognitive workload for users compared to a standard system

JURI SAYS:An Automatic Judgement Prediction System for the European Court of Human Rights

In this paper we present the web platform JURI SAYS that automatically predicts decisions of the European Court of Human Rights based on communicated cases, which are published by the court early in the proceedings and are often available many years before the final decision is made. Our system therefore predicts future judgements of the court. The platform is available at jurisays.com and shows the predictions compared to the actual decisions of the court. It is automatically updated every month by including the prediction for the new cases. Additionally, the system highlights the sentences and paragraphs that are most important for the prediction (i.e. violation vs. no violation of human rights)

Annual Research Report, 2010-2011

Annual report of collaborative research projects of Old Dominion University faculty and students in partnership with business, industry and government.https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/or_researchreports/1000/thumbnail.jp

Tasks for Agent-Based Negotiation Teams:Analysis, Review, and Challenges

An agent-based negotiation team is a group of interdependent agents that join together as a single negotiation party due to their shared interests in the negotiation at hand. The reasons to employ an agent-based negotiation team may vary: (i) more computation and parallelization capabilities, (ii) unite agents with different expertise and skills whose joint work makes it possible to tackle complex negotiation domains, (iii) the necessity to represent different stakeholders or different preferences in the same party (e.g., organizations, countries, and married couple). The topic of agent-based negotiation teams has been recently introduced in multi-agent research. Therefore, it is necessary to identify good practices, challenges, and related research that may help in advancing the state-of-the-art in agent-based negotiation teams. For that reason, in this article we review the tasks to be carried out by agent-based negotiation teams. Each task is analyzed and related with current advances in different research areas. The analysis aims to identify special challenges that may arise due to the particularities of agent-based negotiation teams.Comment: Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 201

Defeasible Argumentation for Cooperative Multi-Agent Planning

Tesis por compendio[EN] Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), Argumentation and Automated Planning are three lines of investigations within the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) that have been extensively studied over the last years. A MAS is a system composed of multiple intelligent agents that interact with each other and it is used to solve problems whose solution requires the presence of various functional and autonomous entities. Multi-agent systems can be used to solve problems that are difficult or impossible to resolve for an individual agent. On the other hand, Argumentation refers to the construction and subsequent exchange (iteratively) of arguments between a group of agents, with the aim of arguing for or against a particular proposal. Regarding Automated Planning, given an initial state of the world, a goal to achieve, and a set of possible actions, the goal is to build programs that can automatically calculate a plan to reach the final state from the initial state. The main objective of this thesis is to propose a model that combines and integrates these three research lines. More specifically, we consider a MAS as a team of agents with planning and argumentation capabilities. In that sense, given a planning problem with a set of objectives, (cooperative) agents jointly construct a plan to satisfy the objectives of the problem while they defeasibly reason about the environmental conditions so as to provide a stronger guarantee of success of the plan at execution time. Therefore, the goal is to use the planning knowledge to build a plan while agents beliefs about the impact of unexpected environmental conditions is used to select the plan which is less likely to fail at execution time. Thus, the system is intended to return collaborative plans that are more robust and adapted to the circumstances of the execution environment. In this thesis, we designed, built and evaluated a model of argumentation based on defeasible reasoning for planning cooperative multi-agent system. The designed system is independent of the domain, thus demonstrating the ability to solve problems in different application contexts. Specifically, the system has been tested in context sensitive domains such as Ambient Intelligence as well as with problems used in the International Planning Competitions.[ES] Dentro de la Inteligencia Artificial (IA), existen tres ramas que han sido ampliamente estudiadas en los últimos años: Sistemas Multi-Agente (SMA), Argumentación y Planificación Automática. Un SMA es un sistema compuesto por múltiples agentes inteligentes que interactúan entre sí y se utilizan para resolver problemas cuya solución requiere la presencia de diversas entidades funcionales y autónomas. Los sistemas multiagente pueden ser utilizados para resolver problemas que son difíciles o imposibles de resolver para un agente individual. Por otra parte, la Argumentación consiste en la construcción y posterior intercambio (iterativamente) de argumentos entre un conjunto de agentes, con el objetivo de razonar a favor o en contra de una determinada propuesta. Con respecto a la Planificación Automática, dado un estado inicial del mundo, un objetivo a alcanzar, y un conjunto de acciones posibles, el objetivo es construir programas capaces de calcular de forma automática un plan que permita alcanzar el estado final a partir del estado inicial. El principal objetivo de esta tesis es proponer un modelo que combine e integre las tres líneas anteriores. Más específicamente, nosotros consideramos un SMA como un equipo de agentes con capacidades de planificación y argumentación. En ese sentido, dado un problema de planificación con un conjunto de objetivos, los agentes (cooperativos) construyen conjuntamente un plan para resolver los objetivos del problema y, al mismo tiempo, razonan sobre la viabilidad de los planes, utilizando como herramienta de diálogo la Argumentación. Por tanto, el objetivo no es sólo obtener automáticamente un plan solución generado de forma colaborativa entre los agentes, sino también utilizar las creencias de los agentes sobre la información del contexto para razonar acerca de la viabilidad de los planes en su futura etapa de ejecución. De esta forma, se pretende que el sistema sea capaz de devolver planes colaborativos más robustos y adaptados a las circunstancias del entorno de ejecución. En esta tesis se diseña, construye y evalúa un modelo de argumentación basado en razonamiento defeasible para un sistema de planificación cooperativa multiagente. El sistema diseñado es independiente del dominio, demostrando así la capacidad de resolver problemas en diferentes contextos de aplicación. Concretamente el sistema se ha evaluado en dominios sensibles al contexto como es la Inteligencia Ambiental y en problemas de las competiciones internacionales de planificación.[CA] Dins de la intel·ligència artificial (IA), hi han tres branques que han sigut àmpliament estudiades en els últims anys: Sistemes Multi-Agent (SMA), Argumentació i Planificació Automàtica. Un SMA es un sistema compost per múltiples agents intel·ligents que interactúen entre si i s'utilitzen per a resoldre problemas la solución dels quals requereix la presència de diverses entitats funcionals i autònomes. Els sistemes multiagente poden ser utilitzats per a resoldre problemes que són difícils o impossibles de resoldre per a un agent individual. D'altra banda, l'Argumentació consistiex en la construcció i posterior intercanvi (iterativament) d'arguments entre un conjunt d'agents, amb l'objectiu de raonar a favor o en contra d'una determinada proposta. Respecte a la Planificació Automàtica, donat un estat inicial del món, un objectiu a aconseguir, i un conjunt d'accions possibles, l'objectiu és construir programes capaços de calcular de forma automàtica un pla que permeta aconseguir l'estat final a partir de l'estat inicial. El principal objectiu d'aquesta tesi és proposar un model que combine i integre les tres línies anteriors. Més específicament, nosaltres considerem un SMA com un equip d'agents amb capacitats de planificació i argumentació. En aquest sentit, donat un problema de planificació amb un conjunt d'objectius, els agents (cooperatius) construeixen conjuntament un pla per a resoldre els objectius del problema i, al mateix temps, raonen sobre la viabilitat dels plans, utilitzant com a ferramenta de diàleg l'Argumentació. Per tant, l'objectiu no és només obtindre automàticament un pla solució generat de forma col·laborativa entre els agents, sinó també utilitzar les creences dels agents sobre la informació del context per a raonar sobre la viabilitat dels plans en la seua futura etapa d'execució. D'aquesta manera, es pretén que el sistema siga capaç de tornar plans col·laboratius més robustos i adaptats a les circumstàncies de l'entorn d'execució. En aquesta tesi es dissenya, construeix i avalua un model d'argumentació basat en raonament defeasible per a un sistema de planificació cooperativa multiagent. El sistema dissenyat és independent del domini, demostrant així la capacitat de resoldre problemes en diferents contextos d'aplicació. Concretament el sistema s'ha avaluat en dominis sensibles al context com és la inte·ligència Ambiental i en problemes de les competicions internacionals de planificació.Pajares Ferrando, S. (2016). Defeasible Argumentation for Cooperative Multi-Agent Planning [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/60159TESISCompendi

Text Similarity Between Concepts Extracted from Source Code and Documentation

Context: Constant evolution in software systems often results in its documentation losing sync with the content of the source code. The traceability research field has often helped in the past with the aim to recover links between code and documentation, when the two fell out of sync. Objective: The aim of this paper is to compare the concepts contained within the source code of a system with those extracted from its documentation, in order to detect how similar these two sets are. If vastly different, the difference between the two sets might indicate a considerable ageing of the documentation, and a need to update it. Methods: In this paper we reduce the source code of 50 software systems to a set of key terms, each containing the concepts of one of the systems sampled. At the same time, we reduce the documentation of each system to another set of key terms. We then use four different approaches for set comparison to detect how the sets are similar. Results: Using the well known Jaccard index as the benchmark for the comparisons, we have discovered that the cosine distance has excellent comparative powers, and depending on the pre-training of the machine learning model. In particular, the SpaCy and the FastText embeddings offer up to 80% and 90% similarity scores. Conclusion: For most of the sampled systems, the source code and the documentation tend to contain very similar concepts. Given the accuracy for one pre-trained model (e.g., FastText), it becomes also evident that a few systems show a measurable drift between the concepts contained in the documentation and in the source code.</p